markj11 wrote:How come you do not consider W for RP?Thanks for the spread sheet.

I did in my last years spreadsheet but figured that was probably the biggest crap shoot to try to predict so I figured I would move guys up or down manually if a player normally gets alot of wins or if they normally don't. By all means add that into the formula if you want but I figured I would go without this year.

Jason

Here's my article on projecting wins. The methodology used in there is by no means professional but I gave it as thorough a handling as my non-professional stats background (read: I don't have the first clue how to do a regression analysis) allowed. It seems fairly accurate over a large data set (say all of the closers in a given season) but there's such a chance for wild fluctuations in the small data sets of closers that it can seem that there's no rhyme or reason. Wins do seem to follow predictable patterns when you look at closers as a group though...it's just that an individual closer may or may not end up anywhere near his projected wins.

That is superb. Interesting to revisit some of the old 'Middle Relief Strategy' threads to see what one could do with that kind of information. It seems like an elite MR in 5x5 could give you the ratios, without harming the team as much in wins as might have been believed.

markj11 wrote:How come you do not consider W for RP?Thanks for the spread sheet.

I did in my last years spreadsheet but figured that was probably the biggest crap shoot to try to predict so I figured I would move guys up or down manually if a player normally gets alot of wins or if they normally don't. By all means add that into the formula if you want but I figured I would go without this year.

Jason

Here's my article on projecting wins. The methodology used in there is by no means professional but I gave it as thorough a handling as my non-professional stats background (read: I don't have the first clue how to do a regression analysis) allowed. It seems fairly accurate over a large data set (say all of the closers in a given season) but there's such a chance for wild fluctuations in the small data sets of closers that it can seem that there's no rhyme or reason. Wins do seem to follow predictable patterns when you look at closers as a group though...it's just that an individual closer may or may not end up anywhere near his projected wins.

That is superb. Interesting to revisit some of the old 'Middle Relief Strategy' threads to see what one could do with that kind of information. It seems like an elite MR in 5x5 could give you the ratios, without harming the team as much in wins as might have been believed.

The interesting thing (at least to me) was that closers were actually better in getting decisions than MR's....much better in fact. Starters were best at 1 decision / 8.435 ip, closers next with 1 decision / 8.787 ip while the middle relievers only got 1 decision / 10.099 ip. Even at that ratio though MR's can be money in the wins category (or at least wins/ip) since era versus run support seems to be a fairly accurate predictor of winning percentage and many MR's have great era's (especially as compared to FA starting pitchers). A MR that pitches 90 innings will give you about 9 decisions but even with a .555 winning percentage that's 5 wins in 90 innings or 18ip / win (and that's for a fairly pedestrian MR). A FA sp might put up about 200 innings to get you 24 decisions but even a decent one (off the FA list) might have a winning percentage around .420 to get you a 10-14 record. 10 wins in 200 ip gives you a 20ip / win ratio so in this example the MR is contributing more positively to your wins/ip than the SP.

Taking that same example of 18ip/win for the MR and 20ip/win for the SP we can use the 12-team yahoo league info that GTWMA collected to predict the difference that would make in points from the category if your team was made up entirely of guys that posted those numbers. 18ip/win over 1250ip gives you 69.44 wins. 20ip/win gives you 62.5 wins. The MR gives you about 3.6 points in the category while the SP gives you about 2.4 points. Neither is very good in this example but using all MR's for your 1250ip would mean about 1.2 points difference in the standings in just the wins category versus getting your 1250ip from the SP in our example. This of course ignores the fact that you're getting superior ratios as well.

I've always been a big fan of the MR strategy, but not taken part in any of the debates though.

what never occured to me is that people thought middle releivers were bad for your win catergory. bit of a no brainer that the middle releivers at the end of a normal 5x5 draft will have a better win/9 k/9 era and whip then the available starting pitchers. Plus each year it seems a couple turn into closers netting you even more value.

You can't go wrong.

Not trying to start a debating or anything, but to the analysis, spot on as far as i'm concerned.

United_I_Stand wrote:I've always been a big fan of the MR strategy, but not taken part in any of the debates though.

what never occured to me is that people thought middle releivers were bad for your win catergory. bit of a no brainer that the middle releivers at the end of a normal 5x5 draft will have a better win/9 k/9 era and whip then the available starting pitchers. Plus each year it seems a couple turn into closers netting you even more value.

You can't go wrong.

Not trying to start a debating or anything, but to the analysis, spot on as far as i'm concerned.

As for MR value, I would agree. I've always had at least a couple MR on my teams for as long as I can remember. MR are usually so undervalued that if I need to drop one of the top MR for whatever reason I can usually go back a couple days later and pick them up off the FA list. Solid work LL!!